Missing hour between Mitre Square and Goulston Street

[Rosella]

Indeed Hatchett, however, rather awkwardly this direction of flight is consistent with a killer who was not aware of the Stride murder.

Or a cool and calculating serial killer who wanted to make a point with the apron and graffito.

[Damaso Marte]

Indeed Hatchett, however, rather awkwardly this direction of flight is consistent with a killer who was not aware of the Stride murder.

If the killer lives in Whitechapel, he has no choice but to flee back into Whitechapel. Besides, the Stride murder was significantly to the south.

[Damaso Marte]

Bravo, Abby. Yes, the weight of the evidence leaves us with no questions to answer other than why some people have an itch to reshape recorded history. "I passed the spot where the apron was found about 2.20, the apron was not there when I passed then."

All very clear, and with no element of doubt. And Long had no reason at all to lie about it.

" ...the apron was not there when I passed then."

The best,
Fisherman

Long was not omniscient. He was a fallible human being, with fallible senses, walking a beat in the dead of night. He might have believed with all his heart that the apron was not there at 2:20, because his senses did not detect it at that time...that does not mean it wasn't there.

[Wickerman]

Long was not omniscient. He was a fallible human being, with fallible senses, walking a beat in the dead of night. He might have believed with all his heart that the apron was not there at 2:20, because his senses did not detect it at that time...that does not mean it wasn't there.

But we can take every witness statement ever made and claim that the witness was simply wrong, where is the benefit in that?

The end result is, that we mold the evidence to fit the theory, not an unexpected approach.

In order to consider him wrong, by rights, we should first have some contradictory evidence that suggests he may have been wrong.
Nothing of this nature exists.